It may also be “A”.
If the result of this choice is that the selected and rejected are the same alternative, then you will see the “acceptance and rejection response mode” at work. Below we briefly introduce the differences between different reaction modes.
In foreign countries, Shafir (Shafir, 1993) in his research designed the following scenarios:
Accept the (choosing) response mode: Suppose you plan to spend a week in a warm place. There are currently two reasonably priced alternatives (Resorts A and B). According to the limited information on the two alternatives provided in the travel brochure, Which resort do you decide to accept?
Rejecting (rejecting) Reaction mode: Imagine you plan to go to a warm place for a week’s vacation. There are currently two reasonably priced alternatives (Resorts A and B), but you cannot keep both of your reservations at the same time, according to the travel brochure With limited information on the two alternatives provided, you decide to cancel (reject) which resort?
As can be seen in Figure 1, the various conditions of Resort A are “average” and the characteristics are “poor”: there are neither features that make people particularly like, nor features that make people particularly dislike;On the other hand, resort B is a feature “rich” option, that is, the positive dimension (such as sunny weather, beautiful beaches, ultra-modern hotels) prominent , It is worth accepting; the negative dimension (such as very cold, no nightlife, etc.) is also very prominent and easily rejected.
If you were allowed to choose, where would you go? Maybe your decision is the same as that of most people, and where you ultimately go depends on how the question is asked. In Shafir’s (Shafir, 1993) study, when people were asked which resort they chose to accept, most of the interviewees (67%) chose B; and when asked to cancel (rejected) In which resort, nearly half of the respondents (48%) also rejected B. Resort B is selected to accept or cancel the (reject) booking possibility and the sum of the possibilities is significantly greater than 100%(67%+48%=115%).
Therefore, if you compare the United States to resort B, readers can guess that the chosen and rejected will be the same alternative: when forced to ask, “Which country do you choose to accept as a member of”, the answer may be It’s “United States”; when you are forced to ask “Which country do you refuse to associate with”, the answer may also be “United States”.
In China, the “Small-size-for-big-size: Behavioral Decision-Making Boosts Social Development” column of the “Psychological News” reported two empirical cases that adopted the “acceptance and rejection response model” to boost success.
In Huang Yuanna, Song Xingyun, Shao Yang, Li Shu and Liang Zhuyuan(2018) In the study, we asked volunteers to accept the response mode (Figure 2 left, check) or reject the response mode (picture 2 right, uncheck) decide which organ you are willing to donate. The content of the options that volunteers see is exactly the same, so regardless of whether they accept or reject the response mode, the result of the volunteer’s decision should remain the same, that is, the type and number of organs they are willing to donate should be the same.
However, it turned out that it was compared with the acceptance response pattern (Figure 2 left) , Volunteers have a higher organ donation rate under the rejection response mode (picture 2 right), and the number of organs registered for donation is higher. When asked to check (accept response mode) willing to donate organs, volunteers are willing to donate 6.03 organs on average; when asked to check< span class="text-remarks" label="Remarks">(Rejection response mode) When they don’t want to donate organs, volunteers are willing to donate 8.85 organs on average, which is an average of 2.82 more than the former, close 50% increase! Assuming that one organ can save one person, using the refusal response mode of inquiry, theoretically, nearly 3 people can be saved.
In another paper entitled “Accept or Refusal? The Response Model Boosts the Balanced Choice of Basic and Extended Courses”, Liu Jun, Zhang Zhen, Sun Yan, Han Buxin, Lu Qin, and Liu Pingping(2019) found that compared with the acceptance response mode (Figure 3, left, in the course you want to enroll Tick before), three generations of family (grand, father, grandson) are in rejection response mode (Picture 3 right, cross before the courses you don’t want to attend) will enroll primary school students for more courses(Figure 4).
What’s interesting is that people choose less basic lessons (such as language reading, math sprints, etc.) in the acceptance response mode, but they refuse to respond The selection ratio under the mode has increased significantly, realizing a balanced selection of basic courses and extended courses. It can be seen that simply adopting the acceptance or rejection response mode will change people’s decision mode.
This experiment is a field experiment with high ecological validity. The author asked at the admissions site of a training school in Guangdong: There are now 10 courses, and the response model is accepted.Next, let you choose a few courses; in the refusal response mode, let you throw away a few courses. Finally, look at which classes you want to take. It turns out that you don’t even throw away those courses that you didn’t know before! The multiple-choice courses under the refusal response mode are turned into real tuition fees. Which courses will people pay for? It depends on how you ask: let me choose or let me reject it?
Currently,compatibility hypothesis “Why are the selected and rejected the same alternative?” provides a more reasonable explanation.
The compatibility hypothesis believes that task requirements are significantly related to the prominent attributes of options.
Under the conditions of the acceptance response mode, the dimension with positive attributes in the option is more compatible with the acceptance task. People will pay attention to more positive dimensions to form reasons why they are willing to accept the option .
In the rejection response mode, the dimension with negative attributes in the option is more compatible with the rejection task. Therefore, individuals will pay attention to more negative dimensions to form their own rejection of the option. reason. In the choice of resorts A and B, option B is precisely because of the outstanding advantages and disadvantages, and the reasons for being accepted and rejected at the same time, the contradiction of “both selected and rejected” will appear. result.
Different frameworks, scenarios and methods of inducing will lead to changes in choices. Nowadays, academia and business generally recognize the role of “choice structure”, that is, the arrangement and description of alternatives will have a significant impact on people’s choices.
Acceptance and rejection response modes as a member of the “selection framework” can be used as boosters in the (nudge) toolbox An effective means. With this tool in hand, people may be able to make the outcome of their decision to develop in the direction they desire.
This article is from WeChat official account:Fudan Business Knowledge (ID: BKfudan) , author: Li Shu